S-Type / S type R Supercharged V8 ( X200 ) 1999 - 2008 2001 - 2009
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

mpg

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #21  
Old 01-26-2014, 05:56 AM
cat_as_trophy's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Inverell, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,052
Received 1,442 Likes on 898 Posts
Default

Hey and hi Lawler;

No offense taken - I was just confused. Actually, my reference to Birmingham was an attempt to place our OP Craig. I know of a couple of Birminghams in USA, but unlikely to house any 2.7 diesel Jags.

Now it turns out that both you and Craig hail from the same slice of the UK.
Therefore you will be well placed to advise Craig what your experience is re fuel economy figures.

Cheers.
 
  #22  
Old 01-26-2014, 09:59 AM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,816
Received 4,559 Likes on 3,964 Posts
Default

The STR fuel economy is good. For a 400HP car, it's very good. Right up until you drive it like you stole it.

The diesel's probably OK.

They're pretty heavy cars (for the UK), but then they are nice and solid, so at some point it's just physics.
 
  #23  
Old 01-26-2014, 06:27 PM
cat_as_trophy's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Inverell, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,052
Received 1,442 Likes on 898 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JagV8
The STR fuel economy ... it's very good. Right up until you drive it like you stole it.
The image you conjure up is even cooler than it reads! LOL ...
Hey JagV8, while fuel economy of itself is not a cliff-hanger, a mate and I recently conducted a tandem fill-to-fill test along one of our better highways - not all flat like your M1 but steady 110km/h stuff.

The two cars are identical model, year, 2.7TTD engine etc, even full tanks of premium diesel from the same bowser, but one vital difference - mine with all P Zeros on 18"x8" Mercurys - his with Michelin asymetrics on 20" aftermarket rims 9" front and 10" rear. Conditions hot and dry with little to no traffic. The divided motorway (Sydney to Newcastle) provided side by side or front to back cruise control driving that ruled out differing driving habits.

Two way results? Over 10% increase in fuel consumption for the wider tyre car. Not a surprise perhaps - we expected a difference and that is why we did the test - but the scale of difference was unexpected. We are planning to repeat with petrol burners as soon as we can source 2 or more identical cars.

Any thoughts, anyone?
 
  #24  
Old 01-27-2014, 01:39 AM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,816
Received 4,559 Likes on 3,964 Posts
Default

If you want better mpg go for narrower tyres, within safe limits.

There are no flat M1 stretches worth mentioning within many miles of me - or at all, perhaps. Doesn't really matter as I'm not comparing mpg.
 
  #25  
Old 01-27-2014, 08:08 AM
pab's Avatar
pab
pab is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,766
Received 242 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

>"I'm guessing your from birmingham "

Ya, too many Birminghams in the English-speaking world. Easy to get confused.

Damn, everything around here is either an English-name, some Indian word, or a smattering of French names.

We even have a Worcester pronounced woost'Ah, a Leominster pronounced Leminster, and Haverhill pronounced HAvrill

But we also have a Lake Cochituate pronounced... of forget it.
================================================== =
You dreamed of big star, he played a mean guitar...
He loved to drive his Jaguar
So welcome to the machine
 
  #26  
Old 01-27-2014, 08:10 AM
pab's Avatar
pab
pab is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,766
Received 242 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

>Ya, too many Birminghams in the English-speaking world. Easy to get confused.

And that's Boston as in the NEW England one, not that olde groddy one over the'ah
================================================
Jaguar - it's not an automobile, it's a Motorcar
 
  #27  
Old 01-27-2014, 12:12 PM
police666's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Liverpool, U.K.
Posts: 1,154
Received 221 Likes on 170 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cat_as_trophy
The image you conjure up is even cooler than it reads! LOL ...
Hey JagV8, while fuel economy of itself is not a cliff-hanger, a mate and I recently conducted a tandem fill-to-fill test along one of our better highways - not all flat like your M1 but steady 110km/h stuff.

The two cars are identical model, year, 2.7TTD engine etc, even full tanks of premium diesel from the same bowser, but one vital difference - mine with all P Zeros on 18"x8" Mercurys - his with Michelin asymetrics on 20" aftermarket rims 9" front and 10" rear. Conditions hot and dry with little to no traffic. The divided motorway (Sydney to Newcastle) provided side by side or front to back cruise control driving that ruled out differing driving habits.

Two way results? Over 10% increase in fuel consumption for the wider tyre car. Not a surprise perhaps - we expected a difference and that is why we did the test - but the scale of difference was unexpected. We are planning to repeat with petrol burners as soon as we can source 2 or more identical cars.

Any thoughts, anyone?
The test means absolutely nothing. Only way to test is use the 1 car and swap the wheels.

2 cars will have different fuel usage stats even if they are "identical"
 
  #28  
Old 01-27-2014, 04:36 PM
cat_as_trophy's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Inverell, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,052
Received 1,442 Likes on 898 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by police666
The test means absolutely nothing. Only way to test is use the 1 car and swap the wheels. 2 cars will have different fuel usage stats even if they are "identical"
Wow! Not being nasty here, but we are genuinely interested in why and how you can give such an apparently knowledgeable rebuff. Your unambiguous dismissal suggests you have some explanation - and evidence?
 
  #29  
Old 01-27-2014, 04:51 PM
Lawler999's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: United kingdom
Posts: 34
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Them funny things that have pedals and a tiny seat to sit on .....I think they are called bikes ....they have very narrow wheels and tyres on the ones called "racers " because they are made to go fast ....
Narrow wheels ,less friction ,faster, less resistance ,less effort to pedal .......
 
  #30  
Old 01-30-2014, 10:30 PM
Wuzupez's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 419
Received 19 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Picking up my 07 STR this Saturday! It's a 3 hour drive home from the dealership so I'm curious to see what I will average (mpg) on the drive home! I will "TRY" to behave most of the time with the throttle, but I make no promises!!!
 
  #31  
Old 01-31-2014, 12:12 AM
amgeater's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kenosha Wi
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Driving on the hwy at low speeds 65 I probably can average 20mpg in my 05 str. 12-14 in the city. The str is not good on gas nomadder how u drive.
 
  #32  
Old 01-31-2014, 01:26 AM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,816
Received 4,559 Likes on 3,964 Posts
Default

That is low, have you checked your fuel trims (LTFT)?
 
  #33  
Old 01-31-2014, 08:26 AM
Ingo's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 245
Received 36 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JagV8
That is low, have you checked your fuel trims (LTFT)?
STR is a gas guzzler, i average 17-18 MPG on mine, and i drive conservatively and half of my driving is highway.
 
  #34  
Old 01-31-2014, 09:18 AM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,816
Received 4,559 Likes on 3,964 Posts
Default

Mine does double that on the hway.
 
  #35  
Old 01-31-2014, 12:00 PM
Wuzupez's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 419
Received 19 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

I think when I leave the dealership I'm going to pour some fuel injector cleaner in her! Won't hurt anything so why not!
 
  #36  
Old 01-31-2014, 12:33 PM
tbird6's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Home
Posts: 3,899
Received 802 Likes on 670 Posts
Default

Hey you bought the STR for fun! So have some while driving her home!!

You only live once. Anyone buying a STR is not really too concerned with the fuel cost.
.
.
.
 
The following users liked this post:
Wuzupez (01-31-2014)
  #37  
Old 01-31-2014, 12:40 PM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,816
Received 4,559 Likes on 3,964 Posts
Default

Agreed. But unexplained low figures make me wonder about.... an explanation.
 
  #38  
Old 01-31-2014, 01:57 PM
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Aurora, CO
Posts: 833
Received 198 Likes on 166 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JagV8
Agreed. But unexplained low figures make me wonder about.... an explanation.
Indeed. 12-14 and 20 are about 5-7 lower than what these cars normally get.
 
  #39  
Old 01-31-2014, 02:57 PM
Wuzupez's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 419
Received 19 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Sounds like its in need of a tune-up? Plugs, fuel filter, throttle body service, mass sensor cleaned! Air filter dirty/plugged? Sometimes it's the little things that are looked over far to often. I am an over maintainer of all my vehicles. Always have been always will be. But the throttle body service is a big help. Along with a good fuel injector bottle to put in the tank every 10k to 15k miles. Also my latest thing I have been doing to vehicles is cleaning the mass air sensor with mass cleaner. You will be amazed at a little oil or dirt or even dust that sticks on the resistor that once cleaned off frees up a little power, along with throttle respone. But most importantly mpg!
 
  #40  
Old 01-31-2014, 03:45 PM
police666's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Liverpool, U.K.
Posts: 1,154
Received 221 Likes on 170 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cat_as_trophy
Wow! Not being nasty here, but we are genuinely interested in why and how you can give such an apparently knowledgeable rebuff. Your unambiguous dismissal suggests you have some explanation - and evidence?
You can't compare mpg on two different vehicles, the key word being different.

Add other things like adaptive gearbox, miles on each engine, wear on each engine, air filter type and condition, engine oil type, frequency of changes, spark plugs condition and gap size, coil age and condition, injector age and condition, the type and condition of each wheel bearing, the condition of the breaking system eg slightly sticking caliper etc.., the oil in the diff, the camber of the wheels in fact the whole suspension setup, egr, dpf, the exhaust system etc, the list of differences that will give you different mpg figures goes on and on, after the car we then move on to driver differences, again the list is endless, therfore your results are meaning less. (I realise the diesels you were using don't have plugs and coils, I'm just listing some of the most common reasons for different fuel usage figures between vehicles of the same type)

To have a propper comparison, the test needs to be done on the 1 vehicle in near as possible identical conditions, which is impossible on public roads.
 

Last edited by police666; 01-31-2014 at 03:54 PM.


Quick Reply: mpg



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:22 PM.